Search PubMedSearch

PubMed · 41966468

The impact of an intact rotator cuff on the outcomes of reverse shoulder arthroplasty: a meta-analysis of 20,924 patients.

Abstract

BACKGROUND: While reverse shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA) is commonly utilized for rotator cuff tear arthropathy, indications have expanded to include, primary glenohumeral osteoarthritis (GHOA) with intact cuff. The presence of an intact cuff may influence outcomes after rTSA because preserved cuff musculature can contribute to shoulder stability and force which could potentially improve postoperative function and reduce complication rates. However, studies have reported contradictory results on whether or not an intact cuff would provide better outcomes in patients receiving an rTSA. METHODS: This is a systematic review and Meta-analysis performed according the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, and Google Scholar (pages 1-20) were queried through December 2025. Inclusion criteria consisted of studies comparing the outcomes of rTSA based on whether patients had a diagnosis of GHOA with intact cuff, or had a deficient rotator cuff (ie had a diagnosis of rotator cuff tears without OA, or cuff tear arthropathy). Extracted data included adverse events, improvement in patient reported outcome measures, and improvement in range of motion. RESULTS: Eleven retrospective articles and 1 prospective article met the inclusion criteria with 4,542 in the GHOA with intact cuff group and 16,382 in the cuff-deficient group (cuff tear arthropathy: 15,423 patients; rotator cuff tear: 959 patients). Patients undergoing rTSA for GHOA and intact cuff had a lower rate of revisions (odds ratio [OR] = 0.53; 95% CI: 0.41- 0.68, P < .001; I2 = 0%), overall complications (OR = 0.57; 95% CI: 0.46-0.71, P < .001; I2 = 0%), acromial stress fracture (OR = 0.22; 95% CI: 0.08- 0.59, P = .003; I2 = 0%), infection (OR = 0.43; 95% CI: 0.26- 0.73, P = .002; I2 = 37%), and instability (OR = 0.60; 95% CI: 0.40- 0.90, P = .01; I2 = 0%). In addition, GHOA patients had a better improvement in both American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons scores (mean difference = 7.17; 95% CI: 2.13- 12.21, P = .005; I2 = 81%) without exceeding the minimal clinically important difference, and external rotation (mean difference = 12.00&#xb0;; 95% CI: 9.63- 14.37, P < .001; I2 = 38%). CONCLUSION: Rotator cuff-deficient patients undergoing rTSA have a higher risk of postoperative complications compared to patients undergoing rTSA for GHOA with an intact cuff. They also showed less improvement in American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons scores and external rotation. However, the clinical significance of these differences should be interpreted with caution, as not all improvements exceeded established thresholds for clinical importance.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Mohammad Daher, Imad Ashkar, Tarishi Parmar, Liam Kane, James R Satalich, Christopher S Klifto, Joseph A Abboud. 2026-04-09. The impact of an intact rotator cuff on the outcomes of reverse shoulder arthroplasty: a meta-analysis of 20,924 patients.. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2026.03.023

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

Discover connections

Connections use source metadata and explicit phrase matches, not verified experimental comparisons.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Anti-inflammatory agents after hip and shoulder arthroplasty: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative inflammation after arthroplasty contributes to pain, delayed mobilization and prolonged hospitalization. Recent randomized trials have evaluated pharmacological anti-inflammatory strategies within contemporary enhanced recovery pathways, but evidence after hip and shoulder arthroplasty remains scattered across different drug classes and perioperative regimens. OBJECTIVES: To synthesize recent randomized controlled trial (RCT) evidence on perioperative anti-inflammatory agents after hip and shoulder arthroplasty. METHODS: PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library and Web of Science were searched for English-language RCTs published from January 2020 to March 2026. The 2020-2026 window was selected to update evidence generated under modern arthroplasty, anesthesia, multimodal analgesia and enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) pathways. Eligible trials included adults undergoing hip or shoulder arthroplasty and compared corticosteroids, cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) inhibitors, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID)-based/local anti-inflammatory regimens, or related anti-inflammatory interventions with placebo, saline, no treatment, or the same regimen without the target component. Weighted mean differences (WMDs) were pooled using random-effects models. RESULTS: Nine RCTs involving 800 patients were included. Anti-inflammatory interventions significantly reduced postoperative C-reactive protein (CRP) [WMD=-32.18, 95% confidence interval (CI) (-41.16, -23.21), P<0.001], interleukin-6 (IL-6) [WMD=-31.25, 95% CI (-41.79, -20.77), P<0.001], rest pain [WMD=-0.41, 95% CI (-0.58, -0.23), P<0.001], activity pain [WMD=-0.56, 95% CI (-0.83, -0.29), P<0.001] and hospital stay [WMD=-0.54, 95% CI (-0.92, -0.15), P=0.006]. CONCLUSION: Recent RCT evidence suggests that perioperative anti-inflammatory interventions can attenuate early inflammatory responses and improve short-term pain and recovery after hip and shoulder arthroplasty. Because data were limited and clinically heterogeneous, the findings should not be interpreted as evidence favoring a specific drug class, dose, route, or timing.

Humans

Do wound protectors reduce contamination in total shoulder arthroplasty? A randomized controlled trial.

HYPOTHESIS: Cutibacterium acnes is the most frequent cause of shoulder prosthetic joint infection with skin edges as a source of wound contamination. The primary purpose of this study was to determine if the use of a wound protector device decreases the deep wound bacterial colonization in primary shoulder arthroplasty. The secondary purpose was to assess the effect of device usage on deltopectoral muscle and cephalic vein injury. METHODS: This was a prospective, randomized controlled trial. A total of 100 patients undergoing primary total shoulder arthroplasty were enrolled and randomized into 2 groups: a wound protector group and a control group. Five patients withdrew from the study, leaving 48 patients in the wound protector group and 47 controls. Three deep wound culture swabs were taken after final arthroplasty implantation. The surgeon also graded deltoid, pectoralis major, and cephalic vein injury on a 0-3 scale based on modification to the Tscherne classification of soft tissue injury. The primary outcome of this study was positive culture results for C acnes. Secondary outcomes included total bacterial culture positivity as well as soft tissue injury grades. A subanalysis removing likely contaminant positive cultures (growth >7 days and 1 colony only) was also performed. Comparisons between groups were made using Fisher exact test for categorical outcomes and t tests and Mann-Whitney U tests for continuous variables. RESULTS: The use of a wound protector did not result in any significant differences compared with controls in the rate of positive cultures for C acnes (15% vs. 21%, P = .593) or all bacteria (15% vs. 26%, P = .304). Removing likely contaminant positive cultures did not demonstrate any significant difference in culture positivity (9% vs. 17%, P = .355, for C acnes; 9% vs. 19%, P = .231, for all bacterial species). The wound protector group had better soft tissue injury scores for the deltoid muscle (P < .001) and pectoralis muscle (P < .001). No difference in cephalic vein injury was noted between the 2 groups (P > .05). No difference in surgical time was noted. CONCLUSION: The use of a surgical wound protector device in total shoulder arthroplasty did not significantly decrease bacterial colonization of the deep wound. However, soft tissue damage to the deltoid and pectoralis muscle was less severe in the wound protector group. These findings suggest that this device reduces iatrogenic soft tissue injury.

Humans

Total ankle replacement versus nonoperative management for end-stage ankle osteoarthritis: A comparative analysis.

BACKGROUND: The optimal management of end-stage ankle osteoarthritis remains debated. This study compared short-term outcomes between non-operative treatment, total ankle replacement (TAR), and cases in which indicated surgery was delayed. METHODS: In this secondary analysis of prospectively collected data, treatment survival, Foot and Ankle Outcome Score (FAOS), and patient satisfaction were assessed at baseline and at 1- and 2-year follow-up. RESULTS: In a total of 316 patients one-year treatment survival was highest for TAR (99.3%), followed by NOM (94.4%) and delayed surgery (80.9%). TAR demonstrated significantly superior FAOS pain and quality-of-life scores compared with NOM and delayed surgery. Delayed surgery was associated with significantly worse pain and quality-of-life outcomes. Patient satisfaction was highest in the TAR group and lowest in the delayed surgery group. CONCLUSIONS: TAR provides superior pain relief, quality of life, and satisfaction compared with non-operative management in end-stage ankle OA. While NOM remains a valid option for selected patients, delaying indicated surgery results in inferior outcomes, underscoring the importance of timely, shared decision-making.

Humans